Full Text
Translation output
$-5,39 & 46
IN THE HIGH COURT OF l)i:ijn AT NFW 1)1 I Hi
VV.P.(C) 383/2015
MADAN LAL (w MADAN l.AL CViiPTA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF l)i:ijn AT NFW 1)1 I Hi
VV.P.(C) 383/2015
MADAN LAL (w MADAN l.AL CViiPTA
VERSUS
NLW DLLHI Ml'NIClPAL COl NCIL ANR
\\l)
VV.i\(C) 426/201-'
SUSl IIL KLJMAR & ORS
\\l)
VV.i\(C) 426/201-'
SUSl IIL KLJMAR & ORS
VERSUS
NLW DLl.lil Ml NICIPAi COl \C!L ct ORS
\\l /
VV.P.(C) 454/2015
RAMLSll versLis
, PeiuioiK'i
. Ivc-,pi ii idoiit'
1ViilKMk"
1'';s| loiiJcrii- iC'iitio!:.':'
N13MC i<osp>Midciil>
'iirougii: Nh- Pr;,nab Prakash. Mr
Bishnc;i and ;Vlr Raiiiif h.U'Mj'
/VcKocales tor pciitiniK'! ni i!,. v ai
Mr Pi\ Li^ii l^-ahhakar ai,d vC RiC,:i
Ni-:iriiia. \d\ o^aic:. loi nor ai
:u-n l->i' i'. Sliai'ina and Mi- iC-i n-m' a:
Ad\ c)caics lor R-2 tKi J in item no, Mr Anand Shailani. Ad\ do ue lor iK-iiiioncr in iiein nu.4().
Ml Ariun l^anl, Ad\ocaia iwi' NDMC lit iioin iu)s.5. 39 it 40.
Ms Chanchal Sharni. Aci\\)..;i;j n,.- !:
2 in iiem no.46, ( ORAAl:
HON'inj; MR. ,n snci; \ (liiH bakhri
O R D i: R
% 16.01.2015
CM No.632/20i5 in \\ l> rrA
2015:DHC:11495
CM Nos.709-71 1/2015 in W.P.(C) 426/2015
\\ .P.(C) 454/2015
Allowed, sLibjecl to all just exceptions.
The appliccUions stand disposed of.
\\ .P.(C) 383/2015 & C M No.631/2015
W.P.(C) 426/2015 &
\V .P.(C) 454/2015 &CM No.755/2015 ^
The petitioners have filed the present petitions seeking an injunction restraining the respondents from disturbing the petitioners in carrying'on with their respecti\'e trades. The petitioners claim to be squatters who are carrving on their respective trades on the streets. This is disputed by the learned counsel lor llie respondents, rhe leai'ned counsel tor the parties point out that scxeral similar petitions have been considered by this Court and have been disposed ofwith a direction, enabling the petitioners to m.ake representations before the Committee to be constituted under the Street
Vendors (Protection of l.ivelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act.
2014 (hereafter the \'\ct) which has come into force w.e.f. 04.03.2014. l7e learned counsel for tlie petitioners rely upon one such order passed in
W.P.(C) No.5580/20! 4, wh.ieh reads as under:-
'•Present writ petitions have been filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to obstruct or disturb the petitioners in carrying on their trade from their respective sites till the Town
Vending Coinmitlee of NDMC issues certitlcate ofvending to the petitioners in accordance with Section 3(3) ol the Stieet
Vendors (l^rotection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
Vendinti) Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 2014') and in terms of order dated 09th September, 2013 passed by the
Supreme Court in Maluirashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and
Another vs. Munieipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai and
Anr., 2013(11) SCALE 329.
Learned counsel for petitioners relies on Section }(.]) o; the Act, 2014 to pra) that petitioners be alknxed to coiui.iue squat at their respective sites.
In support t)l liis sul)iiiis:-.ions. lie relie_> urain ihe
\\l /
VV.P.(C) 454/2015
RAMLSll versLis
, PeiuioiK'i
. Ivc-,pi ii idoiit'
1ViilKMk"
1'';s| loiiJcrii- iC'iitio!:.':'
N13MC i<osp>Midciil>
'iirougii: Nh- Pr;,nab Prakash. Mr
Bishnc;i and ;Vlr Raiiiif h.U'Mj'
/VcKocales tor pciitiniK'! ni i!,. v ai
Mr Pi\ Li^ii l^-ahhakar ai,d vC RiC,:i
Ni-:iriiia. \d\ o^aic:. loi nor ai
:u-n l->i' i'. Sliai'ina and Mi- iC-i n-m' a:
Ad\ c)caics lor R-2 tKi J in item no, Mr Anand Shailani. Ad\ do ue lor iK-iiiioncr in iiein nu.4().
Ml Ariun l^anl, Ad\ocaia iwi' NDMC lit iioin iu)s.5. 39 it 40.
Ms Chanchal Sharni. Aci\\)..;i;j n,.- !:
2 in iiem no.46, ( ORAAl:
HON'inj; MR. ,n snci; \ (liiH bakhri
O R D i: R
% 16.01.2015
CM No.632/20i5 in \\ l> rrA
2015:DHC:11495
CM Nos.709-71 1/2015 in W.P.(C) 426/2015
\\ .P.(C) 454/2015
Allowed, sLibjecl to all just exceptions.
The appliccUions stand disposed of.
\\ .P.(C) 383/2015 & C M No.631/2015
W.P.(C) 426/2015 &
\V .P.(C) 454/2015 &CM No.755/2015 ^
The petitioners have filed the present petitions seeking an injunction restraining the respondents from disturbing the petitioners in carrying'on with their respecti\'e trades. The petitioners claim to be squatters who are carrving on their respective trades on the streets. This is disputed by the learned counsel lor llie respondents, rhe leai'ned counsel tor the parties point out that scxeral similar petitions have been considered by this Court and have been disposed ofwith a direction, enabling the petitioners to m.ake representations before the Committee to be constituted under the Street
Vendors (Protection of l.ivelihood and Regulation of Street Vending) Act.
2014 (hereafter the \'\ct) which has come into force w.e.f. 04.03.2014. l7e learned counsel for tlie petitioners rely upon one such order passed in
W.P.(C) No.5580/20! 4, wh.ieh reads as under:-
'•Present writ petitions have been filed seeking a direction to the respondents not to obstruct or disturb the petitioners in carrying on their trade from their respective sites till the Town
Vending Coinmitlee of NDMC issues certitlcate ofvending to the petitioners in accordance with Section 3(3) ol the Stieet
Vendors (l^rotection of Livelihood and Regulation of Street
Vendinti) Act, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as 'Act, 2014') and in terms of order dated 09th September, 2013 passed by the
Supreme Court in Maluirashtra Ekta Hawkers Union and
Another vs. Munieipal Corporation, Greater Mumbai and
Anr., 2013(11) SCALE 329.
Learned counsel for petitioners relies on Section }(.]) o; the Act, 2014 to pra) that petitioners be alknxed to coiui.iue squat at their respective sites.
In support t)l liis sul)iiiis:-.ions. lie relie_> urain ihe
JUDGMENT
of the Supreme Court in Maharaslui d Ekta Hawkers
Union anctAnother {si\\-)rd) wherein it has been held as under;
"!6. l-or inijv^iiicnlLiiion oj ilic JOijy l\)iicy. wc i.s.siic the lollawiiiii lIii-ccI'h>iis:
AXV.V AXVA' A'XVA' AAA.X
(XV) AH ihc existing street vendors /iLnikeiw opernting neross the c(nu/ir\^ s/uih he cilh>\\\\l in operate till the exercise c/ registixition u/iJ ereuii. -r, of vending hcnvking zones is eontpleted in tenn.s ui the 2009 Policy. Once that exercise is eoriii>leiLd. ihi r shall he entitled to opei'ate onlv in aecoi'dLinee u;//? the orders ihreelions tji ine eont'erncii Io}\'n I ^ihiiee
Committee. "
Learned eounsel for respondent-NDMC who appears on advance notice, states that ihe peiiiioners are not oxisiiiio squatters and are, thereloiv. nol cniitled to proleciK)n uiider
Section 3(3) of .Act. 2014.
Learned counsel for respondent-Nl^MC further stales ili.ii m accordance with the Act, 2014. petitioners should rai>c lii-i, grievances before the (own Vending Committee (lici oiiiaHoi relerred to as "Coinmittee').
Learned coLinsel lor res|')oikleiU-Nl)iVlC also stales liial though the Committee has been appointed, \ei it is run functional as ol'today.
In rejoinder, learned counsel lor iietitionerx \elienieii;i\ disputes the conieniions ad\.iiK.\-J b\ learned cour.sci io'r respondent-M).\lC .
Having heard learned counsel loi- parlies, this Court i:-, o! ihe view that disputed questions of lact are invoked m ilie present petitions. Ihis Court is also of the opinion that m \ lew ol the Act, 2014 ha\ing come inu; force on 4ih March. 2014.
I the approprin'c lorum to deciclc the lis bclwcen iho parlies is ihc
Cominittco.
The .'\ct. 2014 provides ibr constitution of a Committee which is to conduct survey of all existing street vendors and make the scheme for relocation. Section 3(3) of the Act. 2014 cIcarK slates thai no street vendor shall be evicted or relocaled till surve\ sp'ocified under sub-Section( 1) has been completed and the cerlilicate of vending has been issued to all street vendors. ^
Consequentl}', the respondent-NDMC is directed to make the Committee functional as within eight weeks. Petitioners are permitted lo file their representations with the Committee within a pei'iod ol eight weeks, Upon the said representations being filed, the Committee is directed to decide the same expeditiously, preferably within six months.
With the aforesaid directions, present writ petitions and applications are disposed of."
The learned counsel for the respondents submit that although it had been stated that a Committee under the Act had been appointed, iiowcver. the correct fact is that the (T)mmittee is >et to be constituted. Me also po.^' out that the directions have already been issued by this Court for constitutioi^ of the Committee in a lime bound manner and the Committee is expected to be functional after :i peruul ol three months. in the circumstances, the present petitions and the pending applications are disposed ofin terms ofthe order dated 29.08.2014 passed m
W.P.(C) No.5580/2014 and the petitioners are permitted to make representations to the Committee as and when constituted.
Order dasti.
VIBMU BAKMRIJ, J
JAM ARY 16, 2015/MK
Union anctAnother {si\\-)rd) wherein it has been held as under;
"!6. l-or inijv^iiicnlLiiion oj ilic JOijy l\)iicy. wc i.s.siic the lollawiiiii lIii-ccI'h>iis:
AXV.V AXVA' A'XVA' AAA.X
(XV) AH ihc existing street vendors /iLnikeiw opernting neross the c(nu/ir\^ s/uih he cilh>\\\\l in operate till the exercise c/ registixition u/iJ ereuii. -r, of vending hcnvking zones is eontpleted in tenn.s ui the 2009 Policy. Once that exercise is eoriii>leiLd. ihi r shall he entitled to opei'ate onlv in aecoi'dLinee u;//? the orders ihreelions tji ine eont'erncii Io}\'n I ^ihiiee
Committee. "
Learned eounsel for respondent-NDMC who appears on advance notice, states that ihe peiiiioners are not oxisiiiio squatters and are, thereloiv. nol cniitled to proleciK)n uiider
Section 3(3) of .Act. 2014.
Learned counsel for respondent-Nl^MC further stales ili.ii m accordance with the Act, 2014. petitioners should rai>c lii-i, grievances before the (own Vending Committee (lici oiiiaHoi relerred to as "Coinmittee').
Learned coLinsel lor res|')oikleiU-Nl)iVlC also stales liial though the Committee has been appointed, \ei it is run functional as ol'today.
In rejoinder, learned counsel lor iietitionerx \elienieii;i\ disputes the conieniions ad\.iiK.\-J b\ learned cour.sci io'r respondent-M).\lC .
Having heard learned counsel loi- parlies, this Court i:-, o! ihe view that disputed questions of lact are invoked m ilie present petitions. Ihis Court is also of the opinion that m \ lew ol the Act, 2014 ha\ing come inu; force on 4ih March. 2014.
I the approprin'c lorum to deciclc the lis bclwcen iho parlies is ihc
Cominittco.
The .'\ct. 2014 provides ibr constitution of a Committee which is to conduct survey of all existing street vendors and make the scheme for relocation. Section 3(3) of the Act. 2014 cIcarK slates thai no street vendor shall be evicted or relocaled till surve\ sp'ocified under sub-Section( 1) has been completed and the cerlilicate of vending has been issued to all street vendors. ^
Consequentl}', the respondent-NDMC is directed to make the Committee functional as within eight weeks. Petitioners are permitted lo file their representations with the Committee within a pei'iod ol eight weeks, Upon the said representations being filed, the Committee is directed to decide the same expeditiously, preferably within six months.
With the aforesaid directions, present writ petitions and applications are disposed of."
The learned counsel for the respondents submit that although it had been stated that a Committee under the Act had been appointed, iiowcver. the correct fact is that the (T)mmittee is >et to be constituted. Me also po.^' out that the directions have already been issued by this Court for constitutioi^ of the Committee in a lime bound manner and the Committee is expected to be functional after :i peruul ol three months. in the circumstances, the present petitions and the pending applications are disposed ofin terms ofthe order dated 29.08.2014 passed m
W.P.(C) No.5580/2014 and the petitioners are permitted to make representations to the Committee as and when constituted.
Order dasti.
VIBMU BAKMRIJ, J
JAM ARY 16, 2015/MK